Search This Blog

Subscribe to this blog

Follow by Email

Osborne's Bad Time

After a pretty torrid couple of weeks, the tide is once again turning George Osborne's way, as both the tory website Conservative Home and a raft of the quality press start to defend him. ConHome ran an article yesterday defending the shadow Chancellor, while amongst other papers, the Times today has an article explaining the attacks on Osborne as part of a broader right-wing offensive against the Cameron leadership. It may be part of the explanation, although I also think there has been a belief on the part of New Labour that Osborne represents a weak link in the Tory grand strategy. His cavorting with millionaires did the party few PR favours, and he still looks too much like a rabbit caught in headlights when dealing with Gordon Brown or Alistair Darling, but it may be that the worst is over, and that his position is secure enough for him to concentrate on developing a coherent and winning opposition line on the economy.

Get link

Facebook

Twitter

Pinterest

Google+

Email

Other Apps

Comments

consultant said…

You are grotesquely optimistic in evaluating the predicament Osborne and Cameron have found themselves in.

In a time of economic crisis they have completely failed the test of opposition. They have opposed Brown's fiscal stimulus package which has been supported by the leaders of the G20 nations, the Institute of Directors (one of the most Tory business organisations going), the CBI, the Unions and even members of their own party. They have done so without providing any credible, or even coherent, alternative course of action, and as shadow Chancellor the majority of blame for this must be placed at Osborne's door.

This slapdash approach to policy making has left them favouring cuts to public spending when the economy needs spending most and meanwhile they are also likely to oppose the unfunded tax cuts Brown is about to announce. If early 2009 sees Brown go to the country, Cameron will fight an election on twin promises of spending cuts and opposition to tax cuts. Rather him than me.

Brown has already lain the ground to counter the likely Tory claim that spending cuts can come through reduced government waste - in announcing a substantial cost-saving initiative in the public sector he has made sure he will be in a position to say that there isn't any waste left to cut.

This performance to date (coupled with the Corfu icing on the cake) has provided ammunition to Tories who opposed Cameron anyway, but is also beginning to provoke discontent among previously more neutral Tories. They're scared that Cameron and Osborne don't look like they're up to the task.

There are a couple of further points to add to this heady mix, that make their position even less secure.

The first is the opinion polls. Labour have been in power for over a decade and now the country is facing the greatest economic crisis since the 1930's. As Cameron and Osborne have repeatedly failed to pin the blame for this on Labour, their poll ratings have plummeted almost as fast as Brown's have rocketed. This is an unprescedented situation. Brown should not be performing like this in the polls given the state of the economy. Many Tories are demanding to know why.

Second there is the sense that it has been thrown away. The past year has seen the Tories jubilant, treating Cameron practically as prime minister-elect. Labour in contrast have been despondent. The recent reversal of fortunes has reinvigorated the Labour party to take the fight to the Tories, who for their own part are left asking where it all went wrong. Cameron and Osborne took the credit for their early success; I would expect they will have to take the blame now.

If Cameron cannot reverse this decline now he is doomed. But what he needs to do to reverse it is far from clear. He and Osborne seem to be pinning all their hopes on a 2010 election in which, with the economy comprehensively trashed and the case against Labour will be easier to make. But they need to start to consider how they would fight a campaign in 2009, and at the moment the outlook for them is not good.

Popular posts from this blog

The press are certainly able to make a lot of noise. Most of the country may not be that bothered about press regulation, but it has definitely become the NUMBER ONE ISSUE for the denizens of the media class. The Budget is almost looking like light relief tomorrow.

There are a few voices of sanity if you look hard enough. Amol Rajan in the Evening Standard yesterday commented on the dangers of victim justice, while Will Sturgeon on today's Media Blog provides a reminder of exactly why press regulation is on the agenda, and it's not to do with politicians trying to extend their power, funnily enough.

But there is also still plenty of group press hysterics to keep us all entertained, nowhere more obviously than in Quentin Letts' parliamentary 'sketch' in today's Mail. Letts is so focused on pouring vitriol over the heads of any MP who dared suggest that press regulation is needed that he quite forgot to be funny. Or maybe that's become his house style n…

There seems to be a popular liberal narrative emerging about the present state of British politics which is largely summed up by (1) the Tories have got us into a mess over the past couple of years and (2) they, especially Theresa May, should apologise for getting Britain into this mess.

Utter bilge.

There may be a number of things Mrs. May needs to apologise for - a poor campaign, an overly insular leadership style, the loss of a number of Conservative seats - but all these apologies need to be directed purely at the Tory party that she leads and its candidates. Further, an acknowledgement that she has learned lessons from the election and will seek to adapt her premiership to suit those would be helpful and politically adept. But an apology to the country? What a fruitless, pointless, unnecessary exercise that would be.

I presume the apology in question that liberal commentators have in mind would be along the lines of saying sorry for calling an election. Really? In a democra…

David Cameron could be forgiven if he enters the Tory
Conference week thinking about his place in history. This, after all, is a man who doesn’t have to
win another election, since he’s given himself a final term firewall against
any future electoral catastrophes. Not
only that, but he’s been able to witness Big Bad Jezza Corbyn’s utter
catastrophe of a party conference over the past week, with possibly only a few
hours off to mull over the deteriorating quality of western foreign policy
(currently sub-contracted out to the country formerly known as the Soviet
Union).

Corbyn is a delight in many ways. He’s not quite as different as a party leader
as some hopefuls are suggesting, admittedly.
George Lansbury and Michael Foot were also bizarre lefty true-believers
with a lofty disdain for practical politics, and both proved electorally
disastrous for the Labour party, albeit from a better intellectual vantage point
than the fuzzy minded Corbyn. But Corbyn
is the first of that mould …